Slashdot Mirror

Like a gate, DRM can be good, bad or ugly. A good gate will keep uninvited people off of your property and keep your cows on it. Good DRM will protect copyrights from infringement -- and nothing else. A "bad" gate may have a positive use, but we must always weigh whether the negative effects outweigh the good, such as whether a very strong gate keeps firefighters away when your house is on fire. "Bad" DRM might be tolerable, such as a limited download intended for you to be able to "try before you buy" new software, or intolerable, such as a timed out movie intended to prevent people from exercising their statutory right to sell, lend, rent or give away their copy. An "ugly" gate would be the one that creates a barrier where no right exists to do so, such as if I were to place a toll booth at the Brooklyn Bridge. In the DRM world, the DRM that gives publishers cotrol over what they have no right to control is ugly, just plain ugly, and should be prosecuted. No copyright owner has the right to control private performances of their works (e.g., how many times you watch a movie or play a song). No copyright owner has the right to require playback using one particular CD player, computer operating system or media player. No copyright owner has the right to regulate whether I rent my movie, sell my used CD, sell a lawfully made copy of computer software to an artist instead of a student, or play my video games 10 years from now. See http://interactionlaw.com/id13.html

DRM is like a gate. The very same gate can be good (keeps unwanted people off of your property), bad (keeps firefighters from saving your house) or ugly (keeps you out of your own property). DRM may be good when it protects copyrights from infringement, may be bad when an unintended consequence is to prevent lawful uses, and may be ugly when the purpose and effect is to give the copyright owner control beyond the limits of the law, restrain competition, or destroy secondary markets for legal copies of a work. See DRM: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

DRM is like sheep's clothing. Describing it, as the article does, is not enough. The most crucial aspect of DRM is how it is used -- what's under the clothing. A number of DRM tech companies frantically try to please the wolves, and fail to address the need to keep the uses of DRM within legal bounds. My soon-to-be-published article, DRM: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly , tries to explain this.

An interesting analysis of the DMCRA argues that the DMRCA strengthens the DMCA -- but in a good way.